Connect with us

Politics

FCC and CBS release unedited '60 Minutes' Kamala Harris interview amid Trump lawsuit

Published

on

FCC and CBS release unedited '60 Minutes' Kamala Harris interview amid Trump lawsuit

The Federal Communications Commission on Wednesday took the unusual step of releasing raw transcripts and video footage of CBS News’ “60 Minutes” interview with then-Vice President Kamala Harris, which has sparked heated debate over the network’s credibility and press freedoms.

Paramount Global-owned CBS followed FCC Chairman Brendan Carr’s move by separately publishing its interview transcripts and footage from the October interview. CBS turned over the same material to the government Monday night, following a demand by Carr, who was appointed to the post by President Trump.

Carr said that publishing the previously unreleased footage and opening up a case file would “serve the public interest.” The FCC now plans to accept public comment.

“The people will have a chance to weigh in,” Carr wrote on social media site X.

The FCC inquiry has raised the stakes in a separate dispute between Trump and CBS and has also tested the limits of journalists’ 1st Amendment rights.

Advertisement

Trump backed out of a scheduled sit-down with “60 Minutes,” but the network went forward with an interview of Harris in the closing weeks of the presidential campaign. CBS broadcast a clip from the Harris interview on CBS’ “Face the Nation” public affairs program. The following night, a longer version of the Harris interview ran as part of a special “60 Minutes” episode.

Trump and his supporters cried foul, pointing to discrepancies between Harris’ answers in the two interview segments. Trump sued CBS for $10 billion, alleging that the network had engaged in deceptive editing practices in an effort to tip the scales in Harris’ favor by casting her in a more favorable light with viewers.

CBS has denied the allegation, and that court case is pending in Texas.

Carr’s separate inquiry was sparked by a complaint lodged with the FCC last fall by a conservative legal nonprofit group, Center for American Rights, that also accused CBS of news distortion and political bias. Carr’s predecessor had dismissed the complaint, along with three others filed against TV stations owned by major broadcast news organizations. However, in his first week, Carr reopened the CBS “60 Minutes” case and two other election season bias complaints.

Trump’s complaint and the FCC action have stoked fears by some journalists and 1st Amendment experts that Trump and his team could use levers of power to try to chill news coverage unflattering to the president.

Advertisement

The FCC’s release of CBS’ raw transcript and interview drew a sharp rebuke by one of the two Democrats serving on the commission.

“It is unprecedented and reckless for the FCC to disclose the status of an active investigation and publicly share materials before its conclusion and before they’ve been shared with other members of this independent body,” FCC Commissioner Anna M. Gomez said in a statement. “This action sets a dangerous precedent that threatens to undermine trust in the FCC’s role as an impartial regulator.”

In a separate online statement, CBS said it was taking the rare step of publishing “the same transcripts and videos of our interview with Vice President Kamala Harris that we provided to the FCC.”

The unedited portions of the interview proved that the edited version broadcast in October was “consistent with 60 Minutes’ repeated assurances to the public — that the 60 Minutes broadcast was not doctored or deceitful,” producers of the CBS program said.

“In reporting the news, journalists regularly edit interviews — for time, space or clarity,” the CBS News producers said. “In making these edits, 60 Minutes is always guided by the truth and what we believe will be most informative to the viewing public — all while working within the constraints of broadcast television.”

Advertisement

As part of the newly released footage, CBS cameras show CBS News correspondent Bill Whitaker greeting and engaging in polite banter with Harris at her residence. The four-minute segment was part of a “walk and talk” visual to accompany the interview.

“This must feel to you like an especially perilous time for the U.S. and for the world,” Whitaker says to open the interview.

“I think the stakes couldn’t be higher in this election cycle,” Harris said, ticking off political tensions around the world, including in Ukraine.

The portion of the “60 Minutes” interview that drew controversy came during Harris’ answer to a question about the Israel-Hamas war. Whitaker asked the Democratic nominee for president whether Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had been listening to the Biden-Harris administration during the war in Gaza.

During the “Face the Nation” clip, Harris gave a wordy response.

Advertisement

In the “60 Minutes” broadcast, her answer was more succinct: “We are not going to stop pursuing what is necessary for the United States, to be clear about where we stand on the need for this war to end.”

CBS has defended its edits.

“We broadcast a longer portion of the vice president’s answer on Face the Nation and broadcast a shorter excerpt from the same answer on 60 Minutes the next day,” the “60 Minutes” producers wrote.

“Each excerpt reflects the substance of the vice president’s answer,” they wrote. “As the full transcript shows, we edited the interview to ensure that as much of the vice president’s answers to 60 Minutes’ many questions were included in our original broadcast while fairly representing those answers.”

The network also said the transcripts show that CBS did not pull any punches in the Harris interview.

Advertisement

The network’s “hard-hitting questions of the vice president speak for themselves,” the CBS News producers said in the statement.

Gomez, the Democratic FCC commissioner, chastised her colleagues for digging into the issue. The transcripts, Gomez said, provided “no evidence that CBS and its affiliated broadcast stations violated FCC rules.”

“The FCC should stop trying to keep up with this administration’s focus on partisan culture wars and return to its core focus of protecting consumers, promoting competition, and securing our communications networks,” Gomez said.

Daniel Suhr, president of the Center for American Rights, which filed the complaint with the FCC last fall, applauded Carr’s move to release the raw footage and transcripts.

“Transparency is the key to restoring public trust in the media,” Suhr said in a statement. “We look forward to seeing the American people have their say through the FCC’s public comment file.”

Advertisement

Vice President Kamala Harris talks to “60 Minutes” correspondent Bill Whitaker.

(CBS News)

As part of its inquiry, the FCC set a March 7 deadline for public comments.

For weeks, Paramount’s controlling shareholder, Shari Redstone, had been agitating for her team to settle Trump’s lawsuit to facilitate her family’s sale of Paramount to David Ellison’s Skydance Media.

Advertisement

That deal needs the approval of the FCC because of the transfer of CBS station licenses to the Ellison family.

The debate over whether the company would defend “60 Minutes” revealed deep divisions within CBS, a division of Paramount Global. Journalists decried the potential move, which they said seemed designed to placate Trump at the expense of the reputation and legacy of “60 Minutes.”

The issue put Redstone and some high-level Paramount executives at odds with journalists, who expressed dismay that the company did not appear willing to go to bat for one of the network’s premier brands.

Advertisement

Politics

Commentary: No, Mr. Hilton, our elections are not ‘a joke.’ It’s time for you to stand up to Trump

Published

on

Commentary: No, Mr. Hilton, our elections are not ‘a joke.’ It’s time for you to stand up to Trump

Well, that didn’t take long.

A day after California’s primary election, President Trump took to social media with baseless claims of election fraud — predictable, but also dangerous.

“Look what’s happening in California, the Dumocrats, right before our very eyes, are stealing the Vote,” Trump wrote in one post.

“There’s BIG cheating by the Dumocrats in California,” he wrote in another, apparently enamored of his latest juvenile slur.

Advertisement

Never mind that his candidate, Steve Hilton, is in the lead — for now anyway.

California has once again become the main dish on Trump’s buffet of bull-hockey as he continues to undermine democracy and consolidate authoritarian power, using this disingenuous and patently untrue narrative that American elections are rigged by shadowy Democratic forces working in collusion with illegal immigrants.

That last part is called the Great Replacement Theory, the idea that “elites” are replacing white people — and white voters — with Black and brown immigrants in a bid to destroy white culture. It’s at the heart of Trump’s voter fraud allegations.

The twist this time is that Hilton, the man who wants to represent all Californians, seems to be jumping on the election fraud conspiracy train with the president. I get it, there’s the MAGA base to feed, and it’s a base that feasts on outrage and fakery. Serving up resentment glazed with lies and propaganda has been the MAGA playbook for years under Trump, a strategy that no one can deny has been heartbreakingly effective.

But Hilton is a smart man and must certainly know that voter fraud is rare, to the point of being inconsequential to election outcomes. Hilton by his own admission understands voting patterns, and that in this cycle, Republicans have voted early and often by mail, despite Trump’s claims that all vote-by-mail should be suspect. So Hilton understands that early votes have skewed his way, and that later vote tallies will likely favor Democrats.

Advertisement

And Hilton is definitely intelligent enough to expect that in a state where Democrats outnumber Republicans nearly three to one, he will not keep the top spot in this primary, and a slim chance remains that he will not make it into the top two. That’s just simple math.

So if Hilton truly seeks to represent this state as its top elected executive, now is the time to renounce election fraud myths and stand up to Trump’s lies. If Hilton can’t say that he believes our recent election was free and fair, then he has no business being our governor.

Unfortunately, that doesn’t seem to be the path he’s taking, even as it seems increasingly likely that he will advance to the general election.

This week, speaking with far-right podcaster and former Turning Point USA creative director Benny Johnson (who was allegedly duped into working for a Russian influence operation), Hilton said that while “so far we’re not seeing any signs” of cheating, “we’re going to be all over it. We’re not going to let them do that.”

Hilton was responding to a question from Johnson on whether Hilton will sue over “cheating.”

Advertisement

On a post-election appearance with Laura Ingraham, the conservative Fox News host who has repeatedly promoted the Great Replacement Theory, Hilton delved into more conspiracy.

“Just to really underline the point that you made about the corruption,” he told Ingraham an anecdote about supposed fraud in a previous election cycle when a “whistleblower” at the post office told him that they were instructed that a handwritten postmark was acceptable when sorting ballots to deliver to the county registrar.

“It’s just unbelievable, and of course, that’s why so many people don’t believe the results, but it just undermines confidence,” he told Ingraham, certainly knowing that the post office forwarding a ballot on to a county registrar in no way means it will be certified or counted. Would we really want the USPS deciding which ballots to deliver? Disingenuous on Hilton’s part at best.

“The whole thing is a joke,” Hilton went on to say of California elections, which of course, is absurd.

Thursday, when I asked Hilton’s team to speak with him about his views on voter fraud, they sent back a response that focused on the slowness of the California vote count; voter rolls Hilton has described as “wildly inaccurate,” which is a wildly inaccurate claim; and two instances of actual fraud with voter registration — not examples of votes that were counted.

Advertisement

To be sure, all those items are important. Any malfeasance should be punished, and the system should always strive to improve.

But how hard is it to simply be against fraud, while accurately acknowledging that it is rare and our current system provides accurate results?

I am against voter registration fraud. I am against vote fraud. I am absolutely pro-democracy, including policies such as mail-in voting that increase participation.

I do not believe that there is widespread fraud in the California primary, or in American elections in general, because the evidence does not support that conspiracy. I do not believe that Democrats are running a decades-long, nationwide conspiracy to replace white voters with votes from Black and brown undocumented immigrants, because that is both false and racist.

Pretty basic stuff, and statements in line with the values and common sense of the majority of Californians Hilton says he will represent.

Advertisement

If Hilton can’t come out and clearly say that Trump is wrong — about fraud and about the Great Replacement Theory — can he really be trusted to represent the values of the Golden State?

Continue Reading

Politics

Video: Jan. 6 Rioter Hired by Pentagon

Published

on

Video: Jan. 6 Rioter Hired by Pentagon

new video loaded: Jan. 6 Rioter Hired by Pentagon

transcript

transcript

Jan. 6 Rioter Hired by Pentagon

Elias Irizarry, who pleaded guilty to climbing through a broken window at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, now works for an office responsible for uncovering and defending against terrorism plots at the Pentagon.

“Full pardon or commutation?” “Full pardon.”

Advertisement
Elias Irizarry, who pleaded guilty to climbing through a broken window at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, now works for an office responsible for uncovering and defending against terrorism plots at the Pentagon.

By Alisa Shodiyev Kaff

June 4, 2026

Continue Reading

Politics

Democrats split over Tlaib’s Lebanon measure as Republicans seize on Hezbollah omission

Published

on

Democrats split over Tlaib’s Lebanon measure as Republicans seize on Hezbollah omission

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Democrats splintered over a resolution seeking to block the U.S. from assisting Israel’s war against Hezbollah, an Iranian-backed terrorist group, on Thursday. 

The measure, offered by progressive Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., would require President Donald Trump to withdraw U.S. forces from Lebanon. For months, Israel and Hezbollah, a U.S.-designated terrorist group and Iranian proxy, have been at war in southern Lebanon, but the United States has not joined the conflict.

A bipartisan coalition of lawmakers, including House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., rejected the measure. Critics argued the resolution could aid Hezbollah and potentially hamstring U.S. military operations in the country. 

Tlaib’s resolution failed 92-324, with more than half of House Democrats joining nearly all Republicans to vote it down.

Advertisement

The Lebanon war powers resolution divided Democrats, with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., joining Republicans in rejecting the measure. (Aaron Schwartz/Bloomberg)

REP RASHIDA TLAIB MOVES TO BLOCK US OPERATIONS IN LEBANON BUT IGNORES HEZBOLLAH

Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., an Israel critic, was the lone Republican to support Tlaib’s measure. Meanwhile, Reps. Derek Tran, D-Calif., and Betty McCollum, D-Minn., voted present.

House Democratic leaders said shortly before the vote they would oppose Tlaib’s resolution and work with the progressive lawmaker on a narrower measure exempting some U.S. military operations in the country. Their statement also denounced Hezbollah as a “violent terrorist organization” and a “sworn enemy of the United States.”

Tlaib, who has accused Israel of committing “ethnic cleansing” in Lebanon, did not mention Hezbollah in her resolution. She and other proponents of the measure also avoided discussing the Iranian proxy force during heated floor debate over the measure. 

Advertisement

Republicans highlighted the omission and accused the legislation’s supporters of serving as “proxies for Hezbollah.”

“Apparently they don’t want to see Israel killing Hezbollah, even though it’s Hezbollah that is killing Israeli children, Israeli adults, Israeli elders,” House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Brian Mast, R-Fla., said Wednesday, referring to his Democratic colleagues.

Tlaib asserted that her resolution would only affect U.S. forces actively engaged in hostilities. Republicans, however, disputed that claim and suggested it would hurt U.S. efforts to counter Hezbollah. 

“It doesn’t say anything about [whether] you can keep the Marines that are in the embassy,” Mast said, referring to the U.S. embassy in Beirut. “That’s a pretty big oversight. It doesn’t say anything about whether we can keep United States armed forces that are training missions with the LAF [Lebanese Armed Forces]. Again, pretty big oversight.”

Rep. Rashida Tlaib, a Democrat from Michigan, attempted to bar U.S. forces from joining Israel’s war in Lebanon. (Tierney L. Cross/Bloomberg)

Advertisement

RASHIDA TLAIB HIT WITH HOUSE CENSURE THREAT, ACCUSED OF ‘CELEBRATING TERRORISM’ IN PRO-PALESTINIAN SPEECH

The debate turned personal when Rep. Max Miller, R-Ohio, a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, linked Tlaib to Hezbollah.

“Hezbollah is a terrorist organization … and its members are butchers that you like to hang out with to a certain extent,” the Ohio lawmaker said, referring to Tlaib.

A shouting match between the two then broke out, with Tlaib demanding that Miller’s remarks be stricken from the record.

The presiding chair ultimately complied with her request, but Miller doubled down on his remarks.

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“Yes, I said it. I own it, and I stand by it,” Mast said on behalf of Miller on the floor.

Tlaib’s failed war powers resolution comes as Iran has sought to tie Israel’s invasion of Lebanon to its ceasefire negotiations with the United States.

Hezbollah, which has long helped Iran project power in the region, rejected a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Lebanon’s government Thursday.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending